From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
cc: "elionescu@yahoo.com" <elionescu@yahoo.com>,
        "pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: incorrect (incomplete) description for "alter domain"
In-reply-to: 
 <CAKFQuwbZ3KDq3CtG0qtw7gVT4EWgmD8XFMktEFcruVs98ihCSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <172225092461.915373.6103973717483380183@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <CAKFQuwbZ3KDq3CtG0qtw7gVT4EWgmD8XFMktEFcruVs98ihCSw@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 29 Jul 2024 05:56:17 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <2585953.1722265086.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 10:58:06 -0400
Message-ID: <2585954.1722265086@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2585954.1722265086%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Monday, July 29, 2024, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
> wrote:
>> In the Synopsis section of
>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-alterdomain.html
>> this is incorrect (incomplete):
>> "ALTER DOMAIN name ADD domain_constraint [ NOT VALID ]"
>> It should be
>> "ALTER DOMAIN name ADD CONSTRAINT domain_constraint [ NOT VALID ]"

> The definition of =E2=80=9Cdomain_constraint=E2=80=9D includes the optio=
nal =E2=80=9Cconstraint
> constraint_name=E2=80=9D clause.  Though reading the page and seeing the=
 number of
> times we say =E2=80=9Calter domain add constraint=E2=80=9D I even more i=
nclined to agree
> that bringing the word constraint there is desirable.  I am not a huge f=
an
> of the indirect syntax references anyway.

I think the page is technically correct, but I'm inclined to duplicate
this text from the CREATE DOMAIN page:

	where domain_constraint is:

	[ CONSTRAINT constraint_name ]
	{ NOT NULL | NULL | CHECK (expression) }

rather than making readers go look that up.  Is that the same thing
you're thinking, or did you have a different idea?

			regards, tom lane